Eric,I am very curious as to how you are dealing with the touchy subject of the proprietary software necessary to do the installation of a new head?do you expect repercussions from the "parent company" since other sites have pulled all their info off their site due to worries about copyright infringement? Site looks fantastic! Luv the machines clogs. David

That's a good question David. I hate both ends of legal fights, which is why I never signed on to the class action suit against Epson. I created this video to help X900 users who find themselves helplessly pinned in a corner, facing doom, with no hopeful way to get out. This is not my business, in fact this only costs me. Obviously Epson knows common people have access to the servpro.exe program. You can't install a new head without it, and they sell X900 printheads to common people. I don't plan to offer the program. I don't need any more challenges than I have already..

The big question I have isAfter a year of your time and effort, do you still feel it is cost effective to even attempt to replace a head and possibly other ink related assemblies (Cap station -Dampers) while your inside the machine, with a possibility of something else screwing up, rather than for a few hundred $ more, just start from scratch with a new unit and warrantee?

The hidden drive behind my making this video is that I find a cure for clogged heads. Then users will be able to remove them solo. Apparently I am delusional because I still feel confident that a cure is findable. If this happens, this video makes a lot of sense. Even if it doesn't though, installing a new head for $1,400 still saves the machine in my eyes.

Far as something screwing up, once you watch the video you'll understand for yourself - there are no mysteries to this process. Just steps. I am not a big risk taker. If swapping a head yourself was a throw the chips in the air and hope they land right process, I'd be long gone a while ago.

Interesting point about the damper unit. One thing I plan to do in the future is take apart an old, used, damper. I'd like to see why one would need to be replaced. What exactly is the difference, old to new. I had an Epson tech on the phone just the other day who told me straight out that all the damper unit replacement "mumbo jumbo" was crap. This guy was running his machine with dampers from 98, no problems. I won't even get into what he said about using out of date ink...

By the way if you want to replace your damper unit, this same video will do you justice. Premier Pro just exported it at Vimeo codec - it's 1.7gb. That's too big. Where's my framing hammer.

I am again now one of the struggling masses. I just sold our perfectly repaired, perfectly functioning Epson Stylus Pro 7900. I have now re-inserted my neck in the noose. The only X900 here anymore is a "fatally" clogged one...

EricNot in the least bit surprised....its absolutely brilliant.....Success with knobs on...Love the damper cap device.....what a clever stroke !What are you going to get up to nextWell done for all of usMatt

I'm really glad you guys like the video. Thought about it all day doing the framing hammer thing. It's not perfect of course, already I see that I left out the part about unplugging the machine after power-down. I'll have to add that clip and upload it again.

enduser, thank you for that.

Next project - back to clearing X900 heads again. I have new found motivation, since I don't have a functioning 7900 anymore.

Interesting - one cornered X900 user in Canada contacted me a week ago asking if the printhead video was done yet. He told me he had just received his new head from Epson, but that it's part number was different than the part number we have been using. The part number we have mentioned on this thread many times in the past is F191010. But his replacement printhead part number is F191040. When I do Google searches for this different part number I only get results in a foreign language, which Google Translate indicates is Italian. I wonder what the difference is

I'm getting the cold shoulder from Sigma Aldrich on the X-100 order. It seems automated though, they're asking for documentation confirming this is a business, and they refuse to ship to a residential address. I'll head underground and work this out another way tomorrow.

GuysGot the Photoflo from Kodak yesterday !(6 weeks ordered )Will be " drip-feeding " a largish mixture about 2 feet above the disconnected head made of gylcol ,glycerol ,(epson clean solution ) Photoflo and water early next week ......down directly through a nipple on the disconnected head.....quickly followed by a back-syringe suck out through the same nipple....in a very gentle way....anyones guess what might happen..Quite pleased by the power of gravity generated from that distance above the head...Alan ....any idea of the amount of Photoflo that i should start with on experiment 1Matt

I feel that if you can completely bypass the wiper blade you are setting yourself up for success.

Erik....yes or...... If the wiper blade could be persuaded to have a bath more often..

I also feel that if you can keep something moving through the print head while the print head is not in use (perhaps dial in the cleaning solution that has been mentioned here before) then you are creating a situation where there is a low probability for a clog to form inside the nozzle.

Erik....Superb idea...

. On the other hand, chamois cloth is much more expensive, but worth it for this stage of the solution process, as a means. Chamois cloth is designed to clean fine surfaces and cutting up the cloth into smaller pieces, and giving the print head a careful "shoe shine" is what I have in mind.

Erik...If you could get the head cleaned without too much rubbing.....dont forget that your idea involves doing this often and the less friction the better..While this is a subtle attempt the long term solution would be a pump with an auxiliary set of nozzles attached to the print head that gently (like 3ml a day gently) pumps a cleaning solution through the print head while the printer isn't in use.

Erik...It happens in water filtration systems where there is a reverse flow of water every 6 hours to clean out dirty filters...its called a " backwash system ". Would work with printers ...the backwash would need to be a solution based liquid...and indeed the pumps already in the printer could be harnessed to do the backwashing...we would need to bypass the maintenance tank and go directly to a sink if possible....

Really enjoyed going through your concept Erik.....i am going to try doing the same approach but by means of gravity flow and drip feeding....same system as used on patients in hospitals....and of course the old syringe for pulling at the block from the opposite direction...will let you know what damage i can manage....The beauty of your approach is that it would become a built in automatic self cleansing system.....rather a new concept for an Epson product...Would love to see you make progress with this new approach...happy skiing....enjoyed vale etc a few years back now....great sports up there....Matt

" the long term solution would be a pump with an auxiliary set of nozzles attached to the print head that gently (like 3ml a day gently) pumps a cleaning solution through the print head while the printer isn't in use.

Erik...It happens in water filtration systems where there is a reverse flow of water every 6 hours to clean out dirty filters...its called a " backwash system ". Would work with printers ...the backwash would need to be a solution based liquid...and indeed the pumps already in the printer could be harnessed to do the backwashing...we would need to bypass the maintenance tank and go directly to a sink if possible"....

Pretty daft idea if you ask me.Most people here are complaining about wasting ink and a method such as this a surefire way to accomplish that!

Putting cleaning solution through the head at a regular interval means you would be flushing the existing ink out,then the head would need to have the cleaning solution flushed out with ink, and re charged with even more ink before printing. That's equates to three times or more the amount of ink going into the waste tank or "down the drain" Not to mention more nozzle checks done before printing to make sure that there are no clogs or drop outs.